Attempts

Created by: Hayley Petts
Created on: 06-06-14 10:35

View mindmap

Attempts
- definition
  - s.1(1) Criminal Attempts Act 1981
    - 'if, with intent to commit an offence to which this section applies, a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence, he is guilty of attempting to commit the offence'
  - actus reus
    - a person does an act which is more than merely preparatory to the commission of the offence
  - mens rea
    - with intent to commit that offence
- the old law on attempts
  - before attempts was defined in the Criminal Attempt Act 1981 common law tests were used
    - 'last act' test
      - had D done the last act he could do before committing the crime?
    - the 'proximity' test
      - were D's acts so 'immediately connected' to the actus reus of the offence as to justify liability for attempt?
    - Rubicon test
      - D crossed the line into criminality and passed the point of no return with no chance of going back
    - series of acts test
      - D did several things which together could create liability
      - difficult to decide what and how many acts are enough for liability
- Actus Reus
  - acts which are merely preparatory
    - Gullefer (1987) - placed bet at dog race then tried to stop race to get money back when clear dog wouldn't win
      - CA quashed conviction of attempting to steal because had not embarked on crime proper
    - Campbell (1990) - seen loitering outside post office. When stopped by police C had sunglasses, imitation gun and threatening note
      - held to be still preparing
      - needed to enter shop to go beyond the merely preparatory
    - Geddes (1996) - found hiding in school toilets with bag containing knife, rope and tape
      - not guilty as hadn't actually tried to commit offence
  - acts which are more than merely preparatory
    - Boyle and Boyle (1987) - B and B found standing by door with broken lock and hinge
      - B and B has carried out a sufficient series of acts to be attempt
      - entering the building would have been committing burglary so trying to gain access was an attempt
    - Jones (1990) - got into car wearing crash helmet and pointed shotgun at man
      - guilty of attempted murder as done almost everything before he could commit full offence
    - AG Ref (1993) - man dragged girl into shed and attempted **** but couldn't get an erection
      - man had not performed last act but had done enough
    - Tosti and White (1997) - T and W caught examining barn padlock with cutting equipment hidden in hedge
      - by examining padlock men were trying to commit full offence
  - AG Ref (NO1 of 1992) (1993) - D need not have performed the last act before the crime proper nor need he have reached the point of no return
- Mens Rea
  - Intention for full offence is needed
  - recklessness is not generally sufficient
    - there are exceptions
      - AG Ref (NO3 of 1992) (1994) - man threw petrol bomb at car containing four men but missed
        needed intention to damage property but recklessness as to whether life endangered was sufficient
    - Millard and Vernon (1987) - M and V kept pushing fence in football stand
      - not convicted as both were only reckless
  - Easom (1971) - picked up, looked in and replaced handbag in cinema without taking anything
    - not convicted as no intention to steal particular items
    - no evidence that D had intended to permanently deprive owner
  - Husseyn (1977) - loitered near van containing sub-aqua equipment but ran off when saw police
    - not convicted as no intention to steal particular items
- attempting the impossible
  - before the criminal attempts act 1981
    - if crime was physically or legally impossible to commit there was no offence
  - After Criminal Attempts Act 1981
    - Factually impossibility
      - s.1 (2) - person may guilty of attempted to commit an offence even though the facts are such that commission of the offence is impossible
    - legal impossibility
      - s.1 (3) - in any cases where:
        a) apart from this subsection a person's intention would not be regarded as having amounted to an intent to commit an offence
        
        but b) if facts of case had been as he believed them to be, his intention would be so regarded for the purpose of the subsection (1)
        will be regarded as having an intent to commit that offence
  - Aderton v Ryan (1985) - bought video recorder thinking it was stolen but it wasn't
    - video player not stolen so R's acts are 'innocent'
  - Shivpuri (1986) - intended to receive suitcase which believed to contain drugs but actually contained harmless vegetable matter
    - intended to deal in drugs and impossibility no barrier to conviction, overruling Anderton v Ryan

Get Revising

Attempts

Comments

Similar Law resources: